| ▲ | alephnerd 4 hours ago |
| Meanwhile the UEFA was quiet when FIFA used the same Article 27 exception for Ronaldo in 2025 [0]. Maybe the traditional European teams should stop concentrating on personalities and start concentrating on team cohesion. Look at how France was almost defeated by Paraguay until Mbappe was given a free kick, Netherlands defeated by Morocco (most of whose players would have played for France or NL if team selection wasn't so ossified), how Germany was stymied by Ecuador and Paraguay, and Portugal barely eked out a win against Croatia. The Western European teams that have been doing well are those that have younger rosters and are concentrating on team cohesion and talent circulation (eg. Norway, Switzerland, England) instead of superstar player branding (eg. France, Portugal). Either way, based on how Belgium played against Egypt and Iran, the US game would have been difficult for them even without Balogun. If Western European and Cone (Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay are in the same boat) teams don't make national selections more meritocratic, the game will eventually shift to West Africa and MENA, especially given how much money is circulating in MENA football in preparation for the 2030 World Cup in Morocco and how diaspora players are increasingly choosing to play for their second citizenship instead. [0] - https://www.theguardian.com/football/2025/nov/25/cristiano-r... |
|
| ▲ | sailingparrot 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| How has France no cohesion? It just so happens that they have enough superstars to fill the entire roster. You can remove their top 3 best players and they would still be one of the favorite to win. Cohesion and superstars are not mutually exclusive. |
| |
| ▲ | alephnerd 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > How has France no cohesion Look at the Paraguay game. When striking, Mbappe was trying to optimize for making goals on his own instead of coordinating with Kone or Rabiot. There were multiple cases in the Paraguay match when Mbappe attempted a goal in a risky manner instead of passing to Kone or Rabiot who were in better positions to score. Mbappe is basically concentrating on exclusively getting his own goals because he is on track to beat Messi's World Cup record and unlock a mess of sponsorships 4 years ahead of schedule. Heck, all my Moroccan friends were rooting for a French win explicitly because they think they have a better shot at winning against France based on how France played against Paraguay. The same lack of team cohesion has been a hanging albatross for Portugal, Germany, Brazil, and Netherlands as well. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | dmix 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Every major sports league has a history of this inconsistent administration stuff. The goal is ultimately entertainment. |
| |
| ▲ | bhupy 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > The goal is ultimately entertainment This is something I see so many people forgetting. The net result of this decision is simply that the USA gets to play with their full squad and you have an actually interesting competition. The reason we as a world spend hundreds of millions of dollars to let athletes play a game for a living is pretty much exclusively for interesting competition. It serves no other socially useful purpose. Embarrassing for the Belgians and the Europeans to respond any other way than: "we look forward to beating your best team, game on". | | |
| ▲ | NoboruWataya 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | With respect, only an American would think that the competition ceases to be interesting just because the US loses. This is already shaping up to be a really interesting WC with or without the US. Political leaders intervening to give their countries an advantage is what makes it boring. Tilting the scales in favour of a country where you are trying to grow the sport may make financial sense in the short term but it makes for a more boring sport overall. Look at the the historically great teams like Brazil and Argentina, it's not like they have the success they do because FIFA decided that would be the most entertaining outcome. It's not wrestling. | | |
| ▲ | bhupy 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > With respect, only an American would think that the competition ceases to be interesting just because the US loses With respect to you, I'm a lifelong football fan. And read more carefully, the argument I am making is not that the competition ceases to be interesting because the US loses. The argument I am making is that the competition ceases to be interesting because the US doesn't get to field its best squad on account of a highly controversial on-field decision (itself downstream of a mis-application of VAR). Let the chips fall where they may, should the USA lose after this, at least they got to make their best attempt at it. That's all I want as a spectator. | | |
| ▲ | ViewTrick1002 30 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | > The argument I am making is that the competition ceases to be interesting because the US doesn't get to field its best squad on account of a highly controversial on-field decision (itself downstream of a mis-application of VAR). I don’t see much controversy. It is a clear red. Being suspended is the risk you face when challenging that hard. You play with the team you have in the game. Players get injured, suspended or has previous yellows that would leads to a suspension if another is gotten. That’s all part of the game. | | |
| ▲ | bhupy 14 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > I don’t see much controversy. It is a clear red. You're entitled to believe it was a red, but it is objectively controversial. It's not just about what you believe, but what about others might believe. If there are enough people that disagree with you, then it is by definition controversial. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7415223/2026/07/01/folarin-... > You play with the team you have in the game. Players get injured, suspended or has previous yellows that would leads to a suspension if another is gotten. > That’s all part of the game. Correct, and players can get re-instated (as happend with Cristiano Ronaldo in the very same tournament) by FIFA per Article 27. That is also part of the game. The Belgians now need to man up and play the game with a full squad rather than whine about not getting an easy fixture. |
| |
| ▲ | drivingmenuts 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Let the chips fall where they may, should the USA lose after this, at least they got to make their best attempt at it. Well, that, and a President who interferes where he has no fucking business whatsoever and a governing body who kowtows to that same President. This is just flat out cheating. But hey, fuck the rules, right? 'Cause our team got to compete. |
|
| |
| ▲ | lotsofpulp 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It is more entertaining if the rules are the same for everyone. It would be fine if the official rule is red card disqualifies from next game until a dignitary calls. Or red card consequences can be modified for the top or most popular player on a team. | | |
| ▲ | bhupy 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You're right, it's a failure of governance that FIFA doesn't have a proper appeals process for everyone to use. It is unfortunate that the only rules-based mechanism to suspend the match ban had to come from FIFA, which in practice will be arbitrary. It was the right outcome, but the wrong process. | | |
| ▲ | rjrjrjrj 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > It is unfortunate that the only rules-based mechanism to suspend the match ban had to come from FIFA With a little push from the President and Secretary of the Treasury. | | |
| ▲ | bhupy 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Correct. Hence: “which in practice will be arbitrary.” It’s on FIFA to correct for that governance failure by making it less arbitrary via a more universal appeals process. In any case, the rules were followed to the correct decision. It’s just that these rules as written are arbitrarily applied. | | |
| ▲ | rjrjrjrj 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | It seems like there are contradictory rules, and FIFA is confused about which to apply. 5 days ago, FIFA said there was no appeal process. Yesterday, there was a magic reversal. | | |
| ▲ | EPWN3D a few seconds ago | parent | next [-] | | The US had no procedural route to get Balogun reinstated. That doesn't mean FIFA can't wave their magic wand to make it happen. Had FIFA implemented an appeals panel for the tournament, it would've looked at the incident, deemed it a misapplication of VAR and a wrongful red card, and the world would've moved on. Instead because of their incompetence, the only remedy was via their magic wand, which is arbitrary and capricious. l | |
| ▲ | bhupy an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | No, those are not at all contradictory, it is entirely consistent. Two things can be true at the same time: 1. There is no appeals process that USA (or any team) can initiate 2. There is a mechanism that FIFA can initiate to suspend a match ban at their discretion That is why it's a bad system; as long as it's initiated by FIFA, it will always be arbitrary and capricious. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | AnimalMuppet 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I do not follow soccer all that closely, but I seem to recall reading about other heads of state appealing the ban of their players. Sorry, I can't give details - I only have a vague memory of it. Does anyone else recall? |
| |
| ▲ | runarberg 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Where is the fun in watching a rigged game. I‘m actually not sure this statement is true. “The goal is ultimately entertainment” is a thought terminating cliché. What about sportsmanship, competition, beauty, experiencing a common cultural phenomena with the entire world, etc? But even if this statement is true, FIFA needs to learn from the failure of Eurovision and see that people are not entertained by watching a rigged game. For competition to be fun, it has to be fair. | | |
| ▲ | bastard_op an hour ago | parent [-] | | These are basically paid soap operas like American "professional wrestling", and they have quite the following, so what does it matter fake or not? | | |
| ▲ | runarberg an hour ago | parent [-] | | Ones it became apparent that Eurovision was rigged in favor of Israel, the viewership stats plummeted. And worse, the entire sub-culture around Eurovision enthusiast died. WWE is not an apples to apples comparison, as it is widely known among fans that the spectacle aspect of the sport weighs heavier then the competition aspect, as such both the fighters and referees play loosely with the rules to maximize the spectacle aspect. The same is not true of Eurovision, and it for sure is not true of the World Cup and the game of soccer in general. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | pmontra 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | In soccer? I disagree. In Europe the goal is winning or at least seeing the main rivals not winning anything important. Entertainment is secondary. |
|
|
| ▲ | brookst 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I read the article and I don’t see where a head of state publicly intervened to suspend the ban? |
|
| ▲ | fyzx 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Cited article says Ronaldo served a one match ban, out of a "customary" three match ban. |
|
| ▲ | bflesch 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Your statement is false. Ronaldo's 3-game-ban was reduced to the 1-game-ban minimum. In the current case it is about reducing the 1-game-ban minimum to an unprecedented zero game ban. |
| |
|
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [deleted] |
